Post-Racial?
http://www.thegrio.com/politics/lawsuit-claims-obama-cant-be-president-because-hes-mulatto.php
Lawsuit claims Obama can't be president because he's 'mulatto'
Tuesday, Gordon Warren Epperly filed a lawsuit in Alaska challenging President Obama's inclusion on the 2012 presidential ballot. What's Epperly's beef? Apparently, he feels Negroes and mulattoes can't be president because they aren't really citizens.
His lawsuit states:
Barack Hussein Obama II, a.k.a. Barack Hussein Obama, a.ka. Barack H. Obama has the race status of being a "mulatto." Barack Obama's father (Barack Hussein Obama I) was a full blood Negro being born Nyang'oma Kogelo, Nyanza Province, Kenya and raised in the Colony of Kenya. Barack Obama's mother (Stanley Ann Dunham) was a white Caucasian woman being born in Wichita, Kansas on November 29, 1942 and raised in the state of Washington and in the state of Hawaii.
The petition concludes:
As stated above, for an Individual to be a candidate for the office of president of the United States, the candidate must meet the qualifications set forth in the United States Constitution and one of those qualifications is that the Candidate shall be a "natural born citizen" of the United States. As Barack Hussein Obama II is of the "mulatto" race, his status of citizenship is founded upon the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Before the [purported] ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment, the race of "Negro" or "mulatto" had no standing to be citizens of the United States under the United States Constitution.
Alright. So are we now in a place where the, ah, ultra-conservative considers the Constitution to only include the the text of the document and the first Ten Amendments? Is this a legitimate direction for determining presidential candidacy? Is this legitimate political speech?
It appears to me, of course, that this is fully ridiculous -- and as the article says, the 14th Amendment fully settles this issue. So my answer is "no", but let's see what the panel says...
Lawsuit claims Obama can't be president because he's 'mulatto'
Tuesday, Gordon Warren Epperly filed a lawsuit in Alaska challenging President Obama's inclusion on the 2012 presidential ballot. What's Epperly's beef? Apparently, he feels Negroes and mulattoes can't be president because they aren't really citizens.
His lawsuit states:
Barack Hussein Obama II, a.k.a. Barack Hussein Obama, a.ka. Barack H. Obama has the race status of being a "mulatto." Barack Obama's father (Barack Hussein Obama I) was a full blood Negro being born Nyang'oma Kogelo, Nyanza Province, Kenya and raised in the Colony of Kenya. Barack Obama's mother (Stanley Ann Dunham) was a white Caucasian woman being born in Wichita, Kansas on November 29, 1942 and raised in the state of Washington and in the state of Hawaii.
The petition concludes:
As stated above, for an Individual to be a candidate for the office of president of the United States, the candidate must meet the qualifications set forth in the United States Constitution and one of those qualifications is that the Candidate shall be a "natural born citizen" of the United States. As Barack Hussein Obama II is of the "mulatto" race, his status of citizenship is founded upon the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Before the [purported] ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment, the race of "Negro" or "mulatto" had no standing to be citizens of the United States under the United States Constitution.
Alright. So are we now in a place where the, ah, ultra-conservative considers the Constitution to only include the the text of the document and the first Ten Amendments? Is this a legitimate direction for determining presidential candidacy? Is this legitimate political speech?
It appears to me, of course, that this is fully ridiculous -- and as the article says, the 14th Amendment fully settles this issue. So my answer is "no", but let's see what the panel says...